Not unfair at all. It only takes two seconds of research to find verification of gratch's rebuttals. No one is discussing magic underwear or posthumous baptisms.

If you're going to condemn a group I would expect facts to be used in that endeavor. Not hearsay that's demonstrably false.

I guess i should add in the interest of full disclosure that I have no horse in this race as I consider myself agnostic. However, the tone of ATB's posts about Mormonism concerns me in that it comes across as religious intolerance.

As for the accusations of racism in the Mormon church (which is historically true), I think we should also remember that the KKK considered itself a good Christian group.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2012, 01:53:52 AM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

ATB is pretty much just repeating the party line, as is Gratch. Neither is stating anything but hearsay. As an atheist, I think both belief systems are horrible, it's more fun to watch them argue it then to take sides, but I do think you are being a bit unfair to ATB.

No offense to Gratch, but his argument was pretty much out of the book denial arguments.

I'm sorry, what am I denying again? As I said, I'm not LDS anymore and haven't been for nearly 2 decades now. I don't believe in LDS Church doctrine, was just providing a counterpoint to ATB's misleading assertions about Mormon beliefs.

Quote

The fact is they do hold Joseph Smith to great esteem (and his reputation is questionable at best)

Of course they hold him in high esteem...I said exactly that in my post. ATB said that Mormons put Joseph Smith above Jesus Christ, which is absolutely false. Smith's sketchy reputation is a topic for another time, but I certainly wouldn't argue that point.

Quote

they do baptize famous dead people against their family's protests

Yep, and I explained the theory behind it. Again, I made the assumption this is what ATB meant by "Praying people into heaven vs Salvation of Christ"...I may be incorrect in tha assumption. Whether this practice is something they should be doing or not wasn't part of the question and is an entirely different discussion.

Quote

they do wear magic underwear

Sorry, I must have missed where temple garments entered into the discussion? Also, you may not be aware, but "magic underwear" is a rather offensive term. It'd be the equivalent of calling someone's Yamaka a "silly little hat" or someone's cross pendant a "magic necklace". It's something Mormons wear that is an expression of their faith. I've never quite figured out why people had such an issue with it...seems like a pretty harmless personal decision to me.

Quote

they do treat the Book of Mormon as an equal to the Bible

In the sense that they treat the BoM as another holy scripture, sure. It's a bigger part of the same tale, with some very questionable bits about Jesus being in the Americas. I've read it, but don't think it's anything more than an interesting story. Then again, I think the same thing about the Bible. There are some really great things about how we should generally treat each other in both books though...I choose to just focus on those bits. Shame they're so routinely ignored.

Quote

they were openly racist until recently, etc.

True, which is one of the main things that drove me away from the church in the first place. That said, their version of "racism" was keeping minorities from holding the priesthood, which is a quite different than "racism" in the KKK sense.

Yep, what makes him an expert? You could argue every point he made as opinion. As with any religion there is how they present it, and then the truth which may vary with sects or who you are talking about.

For instance, no Joseph Smith is not worshipped as the son of god. True, but as a prophet they base their religion on his beliefs. Their whole religion is based off his claims, they don't worship him, but he is right up there. It's ATB vs Gratch's word on how he is truly viewed.

I'm more willing to accept as fact the claims of an actual ex-Mormon who's displayed no agenda in this discussion (he seems more biased against the group than for, to be honest) than claims of hearsay from an atheist.

In any case, you're changing the discussion. The initial claim from atb was that Mormon's felt Smith was greater than Jesus. You even acknowledge this to not be true in your reply immediately before this post.

The only reason I disagreed with ATB's stance was because I felt it was based on faulty information. I still believe so. That's my only reason for piping up. I was honestly more curious as to whether or not being a Christian was his primary reason for voting for a candidate. No attack intended.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2012, 02:40:44 AM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I don't have a horse in this race either. Just have had he pleasure of seeing this argument play out between coworkers. Both sides are going to claim the higher ground. To say ATB is being ignorant might be true, but you are basically claiming the whole Protestant/Christian side of the story to be ignorant because of what one ex-Mormon said here (which it may be, but I doubt the Mormon church has any higher ground on this). My point is that it isn't that easy, there is more to it than what has been said here and how these two individuals see it.

But you are basically claiming the whole Protestant/Christian side of the story to be ignorant because of what one ex-Mormon said here

No. I claimed one person was. I don't believe ATB speaks for all of Christianity. I also don't believe all of Christianity believes the things ATB does or we wouldn't have had Romney on the ticket for the GOP.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

ATB expressed the same thoughts every Christian I have ever heard talk about Mormonism express. Maybe my experience is wrong, which it very well could be, but he basically said what I have always heard as the argument against the religion was. As was Gratch's response. Nothing against either of them or their views, but this argument has been stereotypical so far.

I'm not claiming to be an expert on Mormon doctrine. However, it seems to me that there are some basic defining tenets of the faith which can be expressed as either true or untrue pretty easily (true in the "yes, Mormons believe that" sense, not the "this is the only way to achieve salvation" sense). I'm certainly not trying to convert anyone...it's more the equivalent of ATB telling me that Mormons worship a purple monkey, and me correcting him that no, in fact, they don't.

As an agnostic, I have no issue with people of faith. I fully support people to believe whatever they want (regardless of how crazy it may sound to me) if it makes them happy and does no harm to others. However, when I hear things like "Mormonism is heresy" - especially when backed up by incorrect assumptions on what that "heresy" actually is - it certainly raises an eyebrow. Because we all know that only good things can happen when you start applying the "heretic" label to an entire faith, right?

You must not know a lot of Christians then, Lee...no offense intended. As I said, I find it hard to believe that Romney would've been up for the highest position in American politics and backed by a party that's very vocal about their Christian values were the majority of that group under the impression that Mormons were heretics that could lead Christians astray (ATB's words).

« Last Edit: November 26, 2012, 03:15:24 AM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

From what I know, a lot of Christians favored Romney because he was a republican and "anything being better than Obama." That was my whole point, I have heard a lot of Christians talk crap about Mormons, insulting them even, but they supported Romney over Obama. I don't understand how a Christian can despise Mormons as a cult yet still want one to be president, so on that very narrow point I give ATB credit.

I don't claim to have any great insight, but I tend to work with very conservative/Christians and reflect on how I see them.

I would agree wholeheartedly with the "spite vote" theory were it not for the fact that Romney beat out 3 others with less controversial religious backgrounds during the primaries.

Are Mormons accepted by Christians without question? I'm certain they aren't. Christians tend to suspect anyone not of their faith. But the level that ATB takes it (heretics? leading folks astray?) is not something I believe the general Christian community believes.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2012, 02:21:15 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I'm not going to defend myself. I chose not to vote for Obama or Romney. Nor am I going to dance the dance and argue theology here. Mormonism is clearly not the same fundamentally as Christianity.

And gratch:

" I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I". Joseph SMith

"no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith…. Every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance… I cannot go there without his consent.… He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven." Journal of Discourses

I'm not going to defend myself. I chose not to vote for Obama or Romney. Nor am I going to dance the dance and argue theology here. Mormonism is clearly not the same fundamentally as Christianity.

Mormonism is just yet another branch (or sub-branch) of Christianity, like Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Pentacostal or Protestant. So while Mormonism may not be the same as your version of Christianity, you're not the determinant of what makes up a Christian faith.

ATB, do you believe that your church still views every single thing written in the bible as literal commands? Do you yourself? Or would you say that over the course of a millennium or so, interpretations have changed and the average Christian no longer believes that slavery is acceptable

Quote

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

or that women are lesser than men

Quote

“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel. To the woman he said, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” (Genesis 3:12-13)

If Christians can accept that the word of God as written by men is not immutable, why aren't current day Mormons afforded the same courtesy?

Look, there's no question in my mind that Smith was working with less than a full set of tools when he wrote his stuff down. But I feel that's true of every man, woman or child who's professed to speak the word of God during their lives (edit: this is a bit unfair, but it's just my belief and is, of course, an unprovable opinion).

Oh, and as for the book of discourses and its position on the role Joseph Smith plays in getting into Heaven?

Quote

...the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name.(2 Nephi 9:41.)

That's from the book of Mormons.

At the end of the day, Mormons believe Jesus was the son of God. They believe he was resurrected by God after getting offed for our sins. They use the Bible in their services...as well as additional text they believe in (are you going to tell me that the Bible HASN'T had chapters added by your definition of Christians over the course of time?).

You'll excuse me if I find it hard to distinguish them from the general Christian population...which includes folks who believe the body of Christ can be consumed during services in some sects, and oppose that belief in others.

p.s. I'm still waiting for why a Romney win would have meant folks would be "lead astray".

« Last Edit: November 26, 2012, 03:27:00 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I had a big long response prepared, but hep beat me to it (and said it better).

It's not worth arguing anyways...ATB is going to believe what he believes regardless. I'll just say this: There are plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to disagree with Mormon doctrine...Lord knows I've poked my own set of holes into most of it (which is why I'm an ex-Mormon). However, mis-characterizing current Mormon beliefs so you can brand them as some sort of dangerous heresy seems (to me, anyways) an unfortunate display of willful ignorance.

Also, because someone disagrees with you does not make them ignorant despite how you try to color it. I'm not ignorant of Christianity nor am I ignorant of the key doctrinal differences (and blasphemies) that make Mormonism incompatible with it.

I'm simply saying that you're ignorant of what Mormons really believe as you still maintain they're heretical blasphemers. A stance I believe stems from your lack of knowledge about what Mormons today really believe. There's no insult intended in that charge. I consider myself ignorant as well, but I'm able to find numerous rebuttals to your posted reasons as to why they're not Christians...and we have Gratch who actually has first hand knowledge and no real reason to lie about it.

...and I'm still waiting on the reasons why this country would have been lead astray by a Mormon president.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I'm simply saying that you're ignorant of what Mormons really believe as you still maintain they're heretical blasphemers. A stance I believe stems from your lack of knowledge about what Mormons today really believe. There's no insult intended in that charge. I consider myself ignorant as well, but I'm able to find numerous rebuttals to your posted reasons as to why they're not Christians...and we have Gratch who actually has first hand knowledge and no real reason to lie about it.

...and I'm still waiting on the reasons why this country would have been lead astray by a Mormon president.

Thanks. I guess I didn't want to believe that a doomsday prophecy born of religious intolerance was the reason. We're now firmly in a realm I cannot even begin to fathom so I should probably just say, "I disagree strongly" and let it go at that.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Mormonism is just yet another branch (or sub-branch) of Christianity, like Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Pentacostal or Protestant.

I want to preface by saying that no one gets to tell anyone else what they can consider themselves, in terms of religion. Catholics and Methodists, etc, are within their rights to say "Mormonism is not Christianity," and members of the LDS are equally in the right to say "Mormonism is Christianity."

However, there seems to be a lot of handwaving in this thread about *why* all Christian churches that hold traditional theological points of view hold the opinion that the LDS is something separate from Christianity. There are fundamental theological differences that cannot be bridged between the two groups.

If traditional Christianity is right about these fundamental things, then the Latter Day Saints are inescapably, fundamentally wrong about certain key issues. Likewise, if the Latter Day Saints are right about these fundamental things, then the Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, etc, are all themselves inescapably, fundamentally wrong about certain key issues.

Everyone has a right to consider themselves a Christian, no matter what he or she believes. Anyone can define their belief of what Christianity is in any way they like. That doesn't change the scale of the differences at play, or that these differences are regarding the key aspects of what it means to be a Christian.

That's the crux of the issue: traditional Christians and Mormons mean very, very different things when they say that Jesus is the Son of God. The traditional Christian view of the Trinity and the Mormon view of the Trinity are irreconcilable. From a theological point of view, this is the most important belief in Christianity. It forms the core of the historic Creeds (which themselves predate the established canon of the Bible)..

Quote

They believe he was resurrected by God after getting offed for our sins.

That's a touchy point. Traditional Christian belief is that Jesus, who himself is God, raised himself from the dead through his own divine power. The statement that "God rose Jesus from death" is, from a traditional Trinitarian perspective, a statement reflecting Jesus's divinity as God the Son.

Quote

They use the Bible in their services...as well as additional text they believe in (are you going to tell me that the Bible HASN'T had chapters added by your definition of Christians over the course of time?).

The canon of the Bible varied wildly until the late 300s, after the Nicene Creed was formalized. The early Church, and today's Catholic and Orthodox churches, built their beliefs on the foundation of the Creeds, not the Bible.

In the Western Church, the Synod of Hippo is credited as establishing a finalized canon of only those books in harmony with the Nicene Creed, while a similar process occurred in the Eastern Church around the same time, producing an identical New Testament canon, and slightly different Old Testament canons. Those canons and their respective books have come down from that point fundamentally unchanged. During the Protestant Reformation, the Protestant Churches removed certain books from the Old Testament, and changed the order of the books of the Old Testament, but did not alter the New Testament.

As to the content of individual books, setting aside translation disagreements, extant evidence shows that the content has remained the same since the time of the official canon being set forth. Some books, particularly the Gospel of Mark, show differences in text in the 100s and 200s, and modern Bibles tend to clearly note the section of Mark that is not found in the earliest extant copies.

So am I to assume that you back ATB's belief that a Mormon president would lead to the apocalypse?

But on a more serious note.

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 02, 2012, 06:27:20 PM

That's the crux of the issue: traditional Christians and Mormons mean very, very different things when they say that Jesus is the Son of God. The traditional Christian view of the Trinity and the Mormon view of the Trinity are irreconcilable. From a theological point of view, this is the most important belief in Christianity. It forms the core of the historic Creeds (which themselves predate the established canon of the Bible)..

If you view Christians with that narrow a definition then you've effectively stated that the following groups are also not allowed to call themselves Christians:

UnitarianismBinitarianism Christian ScienceJehovah's Witnesses

I tend to shy away from sectarian definitions and just go with the belief that believing in Christ as the son of God makes one a Christian in the broadest sense of the word...which is what I go with as someone looking in from the outside. Is that wrong? To a Catholic or a Lutheran or any other specific group within the faith that believes so, then yes, I'm sure I am. But as history has shown us, that's standard operating procedure in religion when discussing someone who doesn't believe exactly as you do.

« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 07:56:23 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

It always amazes me that the are so many religions and takes on each religion with slight variations and yet religions and followers criticise each other etc as if one form of believing in this thing is better than another. A sort of my religionis real and yours is not.

My father always said religion is the cause of more death and wars than anything else. For me whatever way you look at it you can't all be right so when we die and move on there is going to be some very upset people.

My father always said religion is the cause of more death and wars than anything else. For me whatever way you look at it you can't all be right so when we die and move on there is going to be some very upset people.

To be fair, it's also saved a lot of lives in the process. I think it's like anything created by man. It can be used for good or evil.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

My father always said religion is the cause of more death and wars than anything else. For me whatever way you look at it you can't all be right so when we die and move on there is going to be some very upset people.

To be fair, it's also saved a lot of lives in the process. I think it's like anything created by man. It can be used for good or evil.

kinda like spandex.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

So am I to assume that you back ATB's belief that a Mormon president would lead to the apocalypse?

But on a more serious note.

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 02, 2012, 06:27:20 PM

That's the crux of the issue: traditional Christians and Mormons mean very, very different things when they say that Jesus is the Son of God. The traditional Christian view of the Trinity and the Mormon view of the Trinity are irreconcilable. From a theological point of view, this is the most important belief in Christianity. It forms the core of the historic Creeds (which themselves predate the established canon of the Bible)..

If you view Christians with that narrow a definition then you've effectively stated that the following groups are also not allowed to call themselves Christians:

UnitarianismBinitarianism Christian ScienceJehovah's Witnesses

You're ignoring the first sentence from my first post: "I want to preface by saying that no one gets to tell anyone else what they can consider themselves, in terms of religion. Catholics and Methodists, etc, are within their rights to say "Mormonism is not Christianity," and members of the LDS are equally in the right to say "Mormonism is Christianity.""

So am I to assume that you back ATB's belief that a Mormon president would lead to the apocalypse?

But on a more serious note.

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 02, 2012, 06:27:20 PM

That's the crux of the issue: traditional Christians and Mormons mean very, very different things when they say that Jesus is the Son of God. The traditional Christian view of the Trinity and the Mormon view of the Trinity are irreconcilable. From a theological point of view, this is the most important belief in Christianity. It forms the core of the historic Creeds (which themselves predate the established canon of the Bible)..

If you view Christians with that narrow a definition then you've effectively stated that the following groups are also not allowed to call themselves Christians:

UnitarianismBinitarianism Christian ScienceJehovah's Witnesses

I tend to shy away from sectarian definitions and just go with the belief that believing in Christ as the son of God makes one a Christian in the broadest sense of the word...which is what I go with as someone looking in from the outside. Is that wrong? To a Catholic or a Lutheran or any other specific group within the faith that believes so, then yes, I'm sure I am. But as history has shown us, that's standard operating procedure in religion when discussing someone who doesn't believe exactly as you do.

You are correct that certainly Christian Science and Jehovah's Witnesses (I'm not familiar enough with the other beliefs) are not considered Christians by most if not all Christian churches. Fireball summed up nicely the fact that there are significant differences in their definitions around Christs role.

Lutherans / Baptists / any flavour of protestant Christianity are 'quibbling' about interpretation of the sacraments, or the liturgy, or various splinter understandings of scripture, but all have the same core beliefs. Catholics have nearly all the same core beliefs but obviously there are significant differences in both understanding and the sacraments (hence the Reformation). All believe in the same God and the same Bible. Still Christianity. However when a sect or cult starts adding new persons or beliefs, such as new books that are on the same plane as the Bible, then you are no longer following Christianity but have created a new religion, with Christianity as your random seed perhaps.

People have some misunderstandings or presuppositions about Christianity.

1. Being a Christian is not the same as being Religious. I would love to be able to expand more on this but its almost impossible through this medium.The religious leaders of Jesus's day were the ones that hated him so much they cried out for his crucifixion. The common people, tax collectors, harlots, people the religious leaders of that day wouldn't give the time of day to loved Jesus.

Jesus came to do away with the barrier religious hypocrisy had put up between common folk and the Pharisee's(religious leaders)Try to think in terms of today with what I've just written. If Jesus came back today, who would be his biggest detractors?

A lot of main line religious leaders today say Christians should be totally involved in the Politics of the day. Jesus never said anything of the kind. You cannot mix the two...water and oil.

Jesus came and tought us the God is first a Father. He wanted a relationship with us, not for us to work as servants. In the new testament it say's we've been adpoted back into God's family where by we cry out.........ABBA...no not the pop group, but Aramaic for, DADDY. Which denotes fondness, love, caring, covering.

Politics is man's invention. Its a form of controlling the masses. The same as the Religious leaders through the ages have tried. Even those cult leaders of modern times...there were mentally ill people who used "religion" to control people.

Jesus never, ever did that. He spent most of His time on hillsides, talking to the common folk. Not in the Roman citadel's debating politics.

God is love. Jesus was the flesh and blood embodiement of that Love. Totally human, totally divine.

Hollywood love making Christians look like "religious" fanatics. Of course there are those. But let me tell you, there are millions and millions of true Christians who look nothing like the Hollywood movies. Funny how they don't get much air time, isn't it?

So you can have your pre-conceived ideas about what Christianity is, and thats fine. But don't ever think that being a follower of Jesus has anything to do with religion.

Christ Jesus = Loving relationship

Religion= selfish control..............sounds like politicians to me.

But like the Word of God says: Choose you this day whom you will serve...God or Mammon..Mammon meaning money and also the Worlds way of doing things.

I know that everyone at certain times in their lives lay in bed at night, when everything is dark and still and wonder what its all about.God created that "hole" in your heart that you've been trying to fill with what the World offers. Only problem is, the hole is the shape of Jesus and He's the only one who can fit it.

I could care less about Politics. This is God the Father's World not the Republican's or Democrats.

The biblical version of God comes across almost like a supervillain at times, imho. Creating a hole in everyone's hearts so that they need his love? I prefer the version of God that Bobcat Goldwaith used to mention in one of his stand up acts. God is like Hugh Beaumont in Leave it to Beaver. And no matter HOW much you screw up, he's just going to hug you and tell you it's going to be all right. This version of a wrathful God that smites people left and right for offering him the wrong color goat during a sacrifice? No thanks. I'll take a loving God, not Darkseid with better hair.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.